Finsbury Park attack trial - as it happened: Darren Osborne faces life imprisonment after being found guilty of murder
Father-of-four from Cardiff had denied the offences
For free real time breaking news alerts sent straight to your inbox sign up to our breaking news emails
Sign up to our free breaking news emails
Sign up to our free breaking news emails
The Finsbury Park terror attacker faces life imprisonment of being convicted of murder and attempted murder.
A jury took just under an hour to reach the unanimous verdicts, disregarding Darren Osborne’s unsubstantiated claim another man ploughed a van into Muslim worshippers leaving mosques after Ramadan prayers.
The atrocity, shortly after midnight on 19 June, killed one man and injured nine other victims.
Justice Cheema-Grubb said she would sentence Mr Osborne on Friday morning.
Thanking the jury for their service, she added: "These verdicts have an impact far wider than inside this courtroom...they are one of hte most important things you have done in your lives."
Scroll down to read how we covered today's proceedings.
Please allow a moment for the live blog to load
Prosecutors had accused Mr Osborne of conjuring his unexpected defence “out of thin air” and urged jurors to dismiss the “frankly absurd” account on Wednesday.
The father-of-four took to the stand for a second day to tell Woolwich Crown Court the deadly attack was carried out by a man called Dave, who was not seen by witnesses or recorded on CCTV.
“He’s like Dynamo, he’s an illusion, an illusionist, he can make himself vanish perhaps, I don't know,” Mr Osborne told the jury.
The 48-year-old claims he, Dave and another man called Terry Jones planned to attack a pro-Palestinian march in London, hoping Jeremy Corbyn would attend, but were thwarted by road closures.
Mr Osborne told the court that he “wasn’t interested” in finding a new target after driving from Cardiff on 18 June and did not plan to kill Muslims in Finsbury Park, instead believing they were going to a pub.
He claimed that Dave jumped into the van in the four seconds it was not filmed on CCTV and ploughed it into a group of Muslim worshippers helping a collapsed man.
Asking how Dave allegedly took over while the van was moving at speed, Mr Osborne said he put it in neutral and “shimmied over real quick”.
He had “no answer” to a series of questions on why he supposedly decided to change his trousers in the footwell and did not pull over, adding: “We're a peculiar bunch of guys.”
Prosecutor Jonathan Rees QC said the defendant’s account was a “desperate attempt” to evade responsibility.
Closing the prosecution’s case, Mr Rees said the involvement of Dave and Terry was a “fabrication” the defendant cobbled together after hearing days of evidence against him.
Body-worn camera footage shows Mr Osborne telling police he was the van’s driver, initially claiming he lost control before later launching into a rant about Muslims, saying: “At least I had a proper go.”
A police officer who interviewed the suspect in hospital recorded him saying he was “flying solo” and that no-one else was involved in the attack.
The jury is back in court and the judge, Justice Cheema-Grubb, is now addressing the jury.
The judge tells the jury that the law "tolerates strongly held and varied views".
She adds: "In the UK tolerance and freedom of thought and expression are prised...every ordinary and decent person hates child abuse and acts of terror, whatever the colour or creed of the perpetrator.
"That sort of feeling is very different to people who hate a whole religion, the former sort of horror is rational and the second is not."
The judge said people are entitled to whatever views they wish to hold but "it is when those views cross over into illegal conduct that our criminal law gets involved".
She tells the jury: "You must put aside any emotional response you had to the evidence and be objective."
But the judge says Mr Osborne's views are "not irrelevant" because it shows his intent in hiring a van and driving it to London.
She says the "central issue" is who was driving the van during the attack - Mr Osborne or, as he claims, a man called Dave
The judge says that for the alleged offences there is no defence of being "in the grip of moral outrage", being led astray or "being an inadequate loner who was rapidly radicalised by far-right material on the internet."
The judge has explained why Mr Osborne is not charged with a terrorism offence, because "murder is murder" and specific laws are not needed.
She says: "It is unnecessary for the prosecution to bring specific terror charges in this case because murder is murder, whether done for terror motives or some other motive."
She says terrorists commonly aim to kill the population or section of it to terrorise them, advance a cause, publicise their views or put pressure on society.
The judge notes that Mr Osborne declared his aims to kill Muslims and politicians.
Justice Cheema-Grubb "There is no defence to the murder of a Muslim on the basis that some Muslims have abused children or carried out terror attacks."
The judge says the jury may conclude that the defendant's failure to mention Dave and Terry Jones in police interviews and not to bring them up until Friday could help the prosecution's case.
She says the defence case is that he did not tell police about his two alleged co-conspirators because he feared repercussions.
The judge said Mr Osborne initially indicated that he would not be inserting a defene and was "simply putting the prosecution to the proof".
Two defence statements have been inserted since Friday. The first claimed Dave was driving the van but that he "supported" him, while the second contradicted it and said he had withdrawn from the plan and did not know what would happen in Finsbury Park